I read with interest the research article on acute poisoning cases. [1] I have a few concerns regarding the paper.

1. In a hospital setup, it is always difficult to measure incidence rate as the catchment area is ill-defined. A few patients from the vicinity might have gone to the other two hospitals in the area while a few others from the neighboring districts might have got admitted at the hospital mentioned in the study. So, this problem will prevail in all hospital-based studies. The same problem holds true for calculation of mortality rate. 2. There was no age-wise breakup. For example, children are more prone to be victims of accidental poisoning. So, the overall percentage (4.57%) would have been different, had the authors analyzed the group separately. 3. The definition of preventable poisoning was not given. 4. Psychological guidance, as mentioned in the conclusion, may be considered for tailored (focusing on individuals) or targeted intervention (focusing on groups) and not for mass intervention. 5. There is always a possibility of underreporting because of the associated stigma. It should be mentioned in the limitations. 6. A prospective study with focus on socioeconomic status might be undertaken as self-poisoning has multiple personal, social, and economic facets.